Rejections?

[PodChick]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hey everybody,

I was curious if any applicants have been rejected this cycle? If so, from which school?

Just had my Scholl interview, they said they would let me know tomorrow, right before the Thanksgiving Holiday! I hope its going to be good news!!!! If not, at least there will be some comfort food available!

I was really impressed by the campus and facilities. Mandy was really nice and welcoming, as well as the students. I was a little intimidated by the Professor who interviewed me. Toes crossed!!

 

[feets22]

I was put on the waitlist at DMU....so I'm not sure if that is a nice way of rejecting people or not...

I've also interviewed at Temple and have interviews set up at 3 other schools.
As of right now DMU is where I want to be so if I don't end up getting in I will be working for a year and trying again next year.

Hope this helps.
Good Luck.

 

[dawgtired]

Feets22--when did you interview? How soon afterward did you find out you where waitlisted? Do you have any insight into why, like is there anything they would like you to improve to better your chances or it is just waiting....?

 

[feets22]

I interviewed at the beginning of the month and I found out that I got waitlisted on the wednesday after I interviewed.

They didn't tell me why I got waitlisted but I did find out that they were missing some of my letters which probably didn't help. My family doctor actually went to DMU and he told me that I still have a chance of getting in even if I was put on the waitlist. He is a pretty nice guy though...so he could just be trying to make me feel better about it.....

 

[jays2cool4u]

I got rejected from Temple and OCPM. I have an interview in two weeks at Scholl and I was accepted to NYCPM.

 

[WannaBeDPM]

Highly unlikely that anyone will post rejections ....I will gladly do so though! I'll be sending my application in 2 weeks from now....wish me luck 👍

 

[PodChick]

hey jays2cool4u,


did you get to interview at those schools?

Not to be nosy, but was it bc of grades? or just bad luck of the draw?

 

[165007]

rejection by OCPM?

did you take the DAT?

 

[165007]

I was put on the waitlist at DMU....so I'm not sure if that is a nice way of rejecting people or not...

I've also interviewed at Temple and have interviews set up at 3 other schools.
As of right now DMU is where I want to be so if I don't end up getting in I will be working for a year and trying again next year.

Hope this helps.
Good Luck.

I didnt even know DMU actually waitlists people.

I am sure you'll get in. Think positive!

 

[jays2cool4u]

hey jays2cool4u,


did you get to interview at those schools?

Not to be nosy, but was it bc of grades? or just bad luck of the draw?

I was rejected without an interview at both schools. OCPM sent me a generic letter stating that they could not offer me a seat in the class of 2012. Temple sent me letter that was slightly more personable so I decided to call. I spoke with someone by the name of David Martin who stated that he had never seen such a dramatic increase in MCAT scores. This raised doubts in the admissions committee that I was inconsistent in my academic performance.

I took the MCAT twice. The first time I took it, January 2007, I had major drama in my life. I could not sleep, eat, let alone concentrate on the MCAT. Like a *****, I took the MCAT anyway and did terrible. On top of that, I took a Kaplan course for the exam with made me feel even dumber.

I'm a middle school teacher so I have my summers off which was perfect if I wanted to take a stab at this MCAT thing again. So, when school was finally over, I threw all my Kaplan Books in the dumpster and bought the Princeton Review Book, "Cracking the MCAT CBT". I would wake up, eat, hop on the metro, and head to the Barnes and Nobles in G'town almost everyday of my life. I would study for about 4 – 5 hours a day. I went through the book once and read it cover to cover. Then I went through the book again but this time I only did the problems. EVERY problem I did not understand I wrote it on a flash card.

I took the MCAT in September and did much better the second time around. I will not tell any one my scores but I will say that it was a double digit increase from the first score. I'm not upset that Temple and OCPM rejected me. I hear NYCPM is a good school and Scholl is pretty top notch. No worries.

 

[WannaBeDPM]

Congrats on your MCAT victory....
...It seems as if schools are making intense changes this year...I was always under the impression that Scholl was much harder to get into than OCPM or Temple was...Yet it seems OCPM is giving students a hard time this year...

..According to another thread -- they are increasing their class size this year...I wonder how they are going to do that if they are being SO selective that Scholl will offer interviews to those who OCPM generically rejects (insensitive of them to not write a more personable letter IMO)...According to an unmentionable but highly reliable source - OCPM accepts (or has in the past now I guess) close to 85% of their applicants...

...Maybe this is one isolated case -- maybe not...

Thoughts anyone?

 

[JEWmongous]

I actually heard 85-90% of applicants being accepted to OCPM (told this during last year's admission cycle).

 

[Dmayor22]

Meghan told me that DMU accepts 90% of the applicants that they interview. In my opinion they should be much more selective of who they interview.

In my case, I was invited to interview and did, and was told my application was fantastic except that my MCAT score was a little low. I was accepted under the condition that I retake the MCAT and score higher. Not bad except that they want a non-refundable deposit and the MCAT is not offered until Jan. So essentially I would also have to pay a deposit elsewhere or put all my eggs into one basket. I think its their way of rejecting you but with the cost of the trips to get to Des Moines they shouldn't invite people unless they are serious about accepting them. They had my MCAT score well before I was invited to interview. If I had known about my MCAT score before hand I would not of interviewed because I am not taking the test again. I just think its a pretty tacky thing to do but no worries because it was my 2nd choice anyways.

 

[165007]

Meghan told me that DMU accepts 90% of the applicants that they interview. In my opinion they should be much more selective of who they interview.

In my case, I was invited to interview and did, and was told my application was fantastic except that my MCAT score was a little low. I was accepted under the condition that I retake the MCAT and score higher. Not bad except that they want a non-refundable deposit and the MCAT is not offered until Jan. So essentially I would also have to pay a deposit elsewhere or put all my eggs into one basket. I think its their way of rejecting you but with the cost of the trips to get to Des Moines they shouldn't invite people unless they are serious about accepting them. They had my MCAT score well before I was invited to interview. If I had known about my MCAT score before hand I would not of interviewed because I am not taking the test again. I just think its a pretty tacky thing to do but no worries because it was my 2nd choice anyways.

yeah i heard a lot of schools doing this from a friend. I think its dumb.
REJECT OR ACCEPT PLZ.

 

[165007]

Congrats on your MCAT victory....
...It seems as if schools are making intense changes this year...I was always under the impression that Scholl was much harder to get into than OCPM or Temple was...Yet it seems OCPM is giving students a hard time this year...

..According to another thread -- they are increasing their class size this year...I wonder how they are going to do that if they are being SO selective that Scholl will offer interviews to those who OCPM generically rejects (insensitive of them to not write a more personable letter IMO)...According to an unmentionable but highly reliable source - OCPM accepts (or has in the past now I guess) close to 85% of their applicants...

...Maybe this is one isolated case -- maybe not...

Thoughts anyone?

OCPM is being more selective. I think they are harsher on those DAT kids that apply.

 

[j0ez0r]

I believe DMU is very selective on who they invite for an interview. The 85-90% stat is the amount of INTERVIEWEES they accept, not general applicants. They only interview people they are strongly interested in. I believe the amount of interviews to applicants is ~1:3. Correct me if i am wrong.

 

[feets22]

I didnt even know DMU actually waitlists people.

I am sure you'll get in. Think positive!

I hope so. I just found out that I got into Temple.....but I really want DMU.

 

[discusdan]

People get in to DMU off the waitlist.

 

[Feli]

I believe DMU is very selective on who they invite for an interview. The 85-90% stat is the amount of INTERVIEWEES they accept, not general applicants. They only interview people they are strongly interested in. I believe the amount of interviews to applicants is ~1:3. Correct me if i am wrong.

This is true. It says that right on their website^

Most pod schools will accept nearly everyone they interview. Interviews are just used as a general screening process to make sure the person can socialize, isn't a total weirdo, etc. If you get an interview, you will probably be accepted. The catch is that some of the schools are pretty selective of who gets an interview (DMU is one) and some are less selective.

Unlike med or dent schools, pod schools won't generally interview 250 people for 50 seats or anything like that. That's a bit rediculous since plane rides, hotel, taxi, etc certainly aren't free. You can run a simple search on the forums and find people who have spents tens of thousands of dollars interviewing for MD programs and still only getting few/no acceptances. Based on the paper app of transcript, MCAT, LORs, personal statement, etc, the school can pretty much tell who has the qualities they are looking for and the academic fortitude tools it takes to complete their curriculum.

 

[Poddy]

I got rejected from AZPOD they said my app was impressive but not impressive enough to beat out all of the other 900 applicants they have this year.

That is right they told me in my letter they have 30 people trying to get every seat they have open if you do the math that is 900 applicants for 30 seats.

Either they are not shooting straight with me or they are an incredible school. Whats your opinion?

 

[Feli]

...AZPOD ...30 seats...

Now that they're fully accredited, they will definitely be taking a lot more than 30 incoming students per year. I could be wrong, but I think they have nearly 40 students just in the c/o 2009.

Don't sweat one rejection. There are other schools. AZ has a great program by all accounts thus far, but there are other good schools that will get you the same basic knowledge.

 

[Poddy]

I have been accepted to Barry maybe I'll see you there next year. By the way all of the Barry students seemed to be pretty cool when I was there.

 

[165007]

I got rejected from AZPOD they said my app was impressive but not impressive enough to beat out all of the other 900 applicants they have this year.

That is right they told me in my letter they have 30 people trying to get every seat they have open if you do the math that is 900 applicants for 30 seats.

Either they are not shooting straight with me or they are an incredible school. Whats your opinion?

I think they have more than 30 seats this year.

 

[feets22]

People get in to DMU off the waitlist.

Do you think that I should wait and see or just go to Temple? Temple offered a small scholarship which is kind of tempting. My parents said that they don't have a problem sending Temple the $500 to reserve my seat and then backing out if I get into DMU later on in the year. I have interviews at 4 other schools too....so I really don't know what to do. I heard that Scholl and OCPM have really nice campuses.....and they are a little closer to home.

 

[Buspar]

I will not tell any one my scores but I will say that it was a double digit increase from the first score.

Not to be rude, but your score is actually listed in another post so one could easily look it up...

 

[jays2cool4u]

Not to be rude, but your score is actually listed in another post so one could easily look it up...

Buspar

You should have read the entire thread because that score was making fun of all the premeds who post stellar stats but are worried about gaining admissions.

"I have a 40T on the MCAT and a 3.99 Overall and BCPM, what are my chances?"

 

[roadwarrior]

i'll be brave.

i was rejected at DMU, i think it was. so i called. they told me my mcat was awesome but the science gpa not so much. who wants to go to iowa anyway? lol.

 

[HawkeyePod]

I think it is funny now but...

I was rejected pre-interview from Temple, but I got into both DMU and Scholl. WTF?

AZPOD can't get their story straight with me either. First they want me, then they decline an interview, then they want me for an interview?? Too bad I withdrew my application before I got the 2nd or 3rd letter in the mail.

I don't get the admission process sometimes, but at least I'm going somewhere!

 

[WannaBeDPM]

Congrats on Scholl and DMU!! And it's really weird that Temple rejected you...it seems as if OCPM and Temple are going to have trouble filling up their classes this year -- they both have seemed to radically upped their admissions requirements...

I guess it's a good thing...but something drastic like this may end up meaning that they have to accept just anyone at the end of the application cycle to fill their classes...👎

Does this mean that if one applies at the end of the cycle their chances are greater at getting in to some schools than if they applied early? Again, weird!

I know that with the big 3 - Scholl, DMU and AZPOD -- admissions only get more selective with time, but how about the other schools?
Thoughts anyone?

 

[bdaddyjolley]

Congrats on Scholl and DMU!! And it's really weird that Temple rejected you...it seems as if OCPM and Temple are going to have trouble filling up their classes this year -- they both have seemed to radically upped their admissions requirements...

I guess it's a good thing...but something drastic like this may end up meaning that they have to accept just anyone at the end of the application cycle to fill their classes...👎

Does this mean that if one applies at the end of the cycle their chances are greater at getting in to some schools than if they applied early? Again, weird!

I know that with the big 3 - Scholl, DMU and AZPOD -- admissions only get more selective with time, but how about the other schools?
Thoughts anyone?

Temple has upped their admissions standards and had no problem filling their class this year. This year (class of 2011) is said to have the best admission stats to date. They are trying to only accept people with a minimum 20 on the MCAT but I don't know if exceptions are made for special circumstances. The thing is that people on SDN act suprised that Temple has been upping their admission stats compared to DMU, scholl and Arizona because on these forums there is many students from those schools that talk them up. But when you meet people who have not been on SDN and have not seen all the propaganda, they think highly of Temple. Some of the top students at other schools like DMU and Scholl that I know from think very highly of Temple and they are not on SDN. They learn about Temple from other Temple students and can see how ranks with their education, not by reading someones opinion about it that doesn't go there or ever interacted with a student there.

The point is, you can't believe everything you read on here because it isn't all true or it is highly opinionated.

 

[WannaBeDPM]

Touche -- really good point and thanks for the info about Temple filling up just fine...

..Nothing to worry about then I guess!

 

[Buspar]

Congrats on Scholl and DMU!! And it's really weird that Temple rejected you...it seems as if OCPM and Temple are going to have trouble filling up their classes this year -- they both have seemed to radically upped their admissions requirements...

I guess it's a good thing...but something drastic like this may end up meaning that they have to accept just anyone at the end of the application cycle to fill their classes...👎

Does this mean that if one applies at the end of the cycle their chances are greater at getting in to some schools than if they applied early? Again, weird!

I know that with the big 3 - Scholl, DMU and AZPOD -- admissions only get more selective with time, but how about the other schools?
Thoughts anyone?

hmmm...I keep hearing this about OCPM, but I know of people with lower stats who got offered an interview about a month or two ago.

 

[165007]

hmmm...I keep hearing this about OCPM, but I know of people with lower stats who got offered an interview about a month or two ago.

Yea i know people with low stats that got interviews too. I think those people got interviews because they applied early.

 

[cool_vkb]

hmmm...I keep hearing this about OCPM, but I know of people with lower stats who got offered an interview about a month or two ago.

I think admission standards are the same for regular students who are applying straight out of undergrad with average GPAs and mcat test scores. Most people whom i heard got rejected were the non-traditional students who were pursuing some totally different job and suddenly decided to be in healthfield or someone who retook all the courses in community college and got higher GPA or someone entering with GRE or DAT.

I think what the schools are looking now is stability,consistency and reliability. With so many kids dropping out each year , no school wanna start their class knowing they have people who will drop out. They want regular students who are in continous study mode and used to the long study hrs. Damn seeing Scholl's study demand i have second thoughts sometimes🙂. Really Pod school is soooooooo demanding and unless you enjoy the courses and appreciate the end result you will never succeed in pod school.

Its like there is never a time in your day when you feel ah! iam totally prepared for this subject. You just keep on learning even the last minute of exam and still feel you are not prepared. lol!

 

[Cheetos]

I think they have more than 30 seats this year.

We have 35 for the c/o 2011. I believe they overaccept by 10 (so 40 acceptances) knowing that not all will come. So far, there are no plans to increase the class size for the c/o 2012. There is talk that they may increase it to 50 students for the c/o 2013.

 

[cool_vkb]

We have 35 for the c/o 2011. I believe they overaccept by 10 (so 40 acceptances) knowing that not all will come. So far, there are no plans to increase the class size for the c/o 2012. There is talk that they may increase it to 50 students for the c/o 2013.

just 35 students. wow your class must be like a tight knit family🙂

 

[WannaBeDPM]

DMU and OCPM rejected me without seeing my recs or official transcripts -- my grades are of ass quality but still, they rejected me pretty quickly --

so I'm down to the 6 schools now, i figure if OCPM rejected me - surely AZPOD, Cali, Scholl and Temple will do so as well...my bets are on Barry -- lets hope I am not the first to bless these forums with a Barry rejection!

 

[Stafocker]

http://www.rosalindfranklin.edu/administration/InstitutionalSnapshot101206.pdf

Here's SCPM's acceptance/rejection ratio.

Until other schools release this number, it's all bogus guessing on your parts. Even if it's on a website, if it's not independently verified by the accreditation committee then it's filed under "MARKETING/ADVERTISING" and you guys are the victims of it. Just because some Dean tells you your going to the "harvard" of podiatry, he or she might just be trying to market their school, you can't be faulted for freedom of opinion.

Temple, SCPM/RFUMS, DMU, etc have great students. Just because you're at either school doesn't make you smarter than the other guy at another school. There's ALWAYS someone else smarter and someone works harder.

If you get rejected from one school, it should only make you work harder to prove those suckers that they were wrong to reject you.

 

[Stafocker]

Temple has upped their admissions standards and had no problem filling their class this year. This year (class of 2011) is said to have the best admission stats to date. They are trying to only accept people with a minimum 20 on the MCAT but I don't know if exceptions are made for special circumstances. The thing is that people on SDN act suprised that Temple has been upping their admission stats compared to DMU, scholl and Arizona because on these forums there is many students from those schools that talk them up. But when you meet people who have not been on SDN and have not seen all the propaganda, they think highly of Temple. Some of the top students at other schools like DMU and Scholl that I know from think very highly of Temple and they are not on SDN. They learn about Temple from other Temple students and can see how ranks with their education, not by reading someones opinion about it that doesn't go there or ever interacted with a student there.

The point is, you can't believe everything you read on here because it isn't all true or it is highly opinionated.

Exactly, so where is the stats about upping the admission standards for Temple? is this your opinion or do you actually have something to back it up? Don't give me "the dean told me" cause that's just marketing, and it's just propaganda. There's something on the website about Temple being the "harvard" of podiatry... great propaganda, especially when Temple Alum laugh at that. Having an independent evaluator from the accreditation board release these numbers would be more valuable than anything on SDN.

Temple is a fine school as are the rest. There is just a lot of school pride from ppl who chose one or the other, but there is no set standard of ranking students by schools. AACPM/CPME has got to come up with a standard way of ranking students, hopefully by actually SCORING the NBPME Exams I and II instead of pass/fail. The amount of pass/fail is deceptive, i'd rather be scored because how do we compare GPA's of one school to another (doesn't temple do a % thing?? what the hell is that about?)

 

[Dmayor22]

Stafocker, whats your qualms with the % scoring method? Does it really make a difference?

especially when Temple Alum laugh at that

I dont understand that comment. Assuming you have actually met Alums that laughed at that and not just heard about it, why does a few people who disagree with it make it not true or a joke? I'm not trying to imply it is or isn't true, but you seem so quick to dismiss.

Having an independent evaluator from the accreditation board release these numbers

Unless I have misread some of your postings wrong, which is quite possible I think all your stuff has been released by Scholl and not an indep. board, so I guess your stuff should be classified under "Marketing" as well.


All in all I think academic portions of Scholl, Temple, DMU, and even AZPOD are a wash. The only thing that truly matters when you are out in practice is where did you do your training. But I agree, the boards should be numerically scored and not Pass/Fail.

 

[Stafocker]

Stafocker, whats your qualms with the % scoring method? Does it really make a difference?

I dont understand that comment. Assuming you have actually met Alums that laughed at that and not just heard about it, why does a few people who disagree with it make it not true or a joke? I'm not trying to imply it is or isn't true, but you seem so quick to dismiss.

Unless I have misread some of your postings wrong, which is quite possible I think all your stuff has been released by Scholl and not an indep. board, so I guess your stuff should be classified under "Marketing" as well.

All in all I think academic portions of Scholl, Temple, DMU, and even AZPOD are a wash. The only thing that truly matters when you are out in practice is where did you do your training. But I agree, the boards should be numerically scored and not Pass/Fail.

Yeah, you did read it wrong. It's for the accreditation process for 2008 and yeah it's marketing - sometimes facts and figures are released for marketing purposes. Look, SCPM had some bad numbers recently when comparing % pass rate of Part I and Part II, but at least they release it so ppl can see instead of just a bunch of hearsay from students who don't know any better. It's listed under "Reaccreditation process 2008".

http://www.rosalindfranklin.edu/

Well, yes and no. If you don't do well at any of those schools, you're not going to get a good program to train from, plain and simple. You won't use everything they teach and depending on the location, you'll most likely learn differently from what you were taught, but the fundamentals are still the same.

 

[Dmayor22]

Seriously, don't you think a podiatry dean calling their school "harvard" is laughable?

Oh no doubt. I completely agree that most of that kind of talk is credited to high alumni pride.

If you don't do well at any of those schools, you're not going to get a good program to train from, plain and simple.

Agreed. I was meaning more along the lines that I do not think any school has a clear cut advantage to students in the academic dept. Obviously you must do well, no matter where you attend. You get out of school what you put into it. People should go where they can succeed whether that is the Cali school or Scholl or Temple.

 

[Stafocker]

Agreed. I was meaning more along the lines that I do not think any school has a clear cut advantage to students in the academic dept. Obviously you must do well, no matter where you attend. You get out of school what you put into it. People should go where they can succeed whether that is the Cali school or Scholl or Temple.

Amen brother (or sister, not sure with these anonymous forums)

 

[bdaddyjolley]

Exactly, so where is the stats about upping the admission standards for Temple? is this your opinion or do you actually have something to back it up? The amount of pass/fail is deceptive, i'd rather be scored because how do we compare GPA's of one school to another (doesn't temple do a % thing?? what the hell is that about?)

Well, if you read the website, there is there is posted the average acceptance scores. Also, I have done a little surveying myself. I have gotten a really good feel about the scores from many of my classmates who most of them I know now. I have compared that to what some of the students from the class of 2010 and 2009 have said about their collegues stats and there is an upward trend. And yes, the administration has stated the same but I have backed it up somewhat from talking to the students. But I guess you could say it's a conspiracy and everyone is lying to me.

What's wrong witht the percentage way of grading. I think it is actually more transparent than a GPA. The percentage in essances tells you on averge how many problems a student gets right on a test. There is no curve at Temple so what you get is what you get. If you average getting 29/30 on all your tests for example your grade will be 96% after so lets say 5 tests. YOu know right there the student on average got 96% of the problems right on the tests.

A GPA is good but you don't know how much the classes were curved to get that GPA if there is a curve. And if you have ever calculated a GPA, it isn't really different from the percentage score. 90-100 percent=A-, 80-89=B, 70-79=C and below 70 is failing. 4.0 is an A average, 3.0 is a B average, and 2.0 is a C average.

I think you're just splitting hairs now with these little differences in schools and know that Temple is not the only school that uses the percentage score for grades.

 

[jays2cool4u]

Well, if you read the website, there is there is posted the average acceptance scores. Also, I have done a little surveying myself. I have gotten a really good feel about the scores from many of my classmates who most of them I know now. I have compared that to what some of the students from the class of 2010 and 2009 have said about their collegues stats and there is an upward trend. And yes, the administration has stated the same but I have backed it up somewhat from talking to the students. But I guess you could say it's a conspiracy and everyone is lying to me.

What's wrong witht the percentage way of grading. I think it is actually more transparent than a GPA. The percentage in essances tells you on averge how many problems a student gets right on a test. There is no curve at Temple so what you get is what you get. If you average getting 29/30 on all your tests for example your grade will be 96% after so lets say 5 tests. YOu know right there the student on average got 96% of the problems right on the tests.

A GPA is good but you don't know how much the classes were curved to get that GPA if there is a curve. And if you have ever calculated a GPA, it isn't really different from the percentage score. 90-100 percent=A-, 80-89=B, 70-79=C and below 70 is failing. 4.0 is an A average, 3.0 is a B average, and 2.0 is a C average.

I think you're just splitting hairs now with these little differences in schools and know that Temple is not the only school that uses the percentage score for grades.

If your goal was to disprove Stafocker you did a bad job.

 

[bdaddyjolley]

If your goal was to disprove Stafocker you did a bad job.

Not to disprove but to present things in a different way. It seems also that you did a bad job in showing how I did a bad job. You didn't even take the effort to explain your statement.

 

[jays2cool4u]

Also, I have done a little surveying myself. I have gotten a really good feel about the scores from many of my classmates who most of them I know now. I have compared that to what some of the students from the class of 2010 and 2009 have said about their collegues stats and there is an upward trend. And yes, the administration has stated the same but I have backed it up somewhat from talking to the students. But I guess you could say it's a conspiracy and everyone is lying to me.

This was a joke, right? You really didn't mean to present this as fact I hope.

 

[WannaBeDPM]

Someone should have taken Philosophy - Logic 101 in college

 

[bdaddyjolley]

This was a joke, right? You really didn't mean to present this as fact I hope.

So I guess you never believe anyone who tells you what their GPA and MCAT scores are. You assume they are all lying, right? Just because you won't share your scores with others doesn't mean everyone else won't share theirs. My point there was the administration let us know that the bar is higher now and the students coming in this year and last have had better stats than in years pasts. So I being curious asked around to the students about what their stats were. And comon, lots of people ask about their collegue's stats when talking about what school they went to, what there major was and why they chose podiatry and the school they are at. So it seems from my experience of talking to students that what the administation said was correct.

The original point of my posts were that some on SDN stated they had good stats and were being rejected from Temple and worried if Temple could fill its class doing this. So I said I wasnt suprised since talking to classmates and the administration, it seems the standard is higher there right now. There are a lot of sharp people in my class who had great entrance stats and Temple filled more spots than years past. That was my point, that even with the standards higher, they can still fill the class.

 

[jays2cool4u]

So I guess you never believe anyone who tells you what their GPA and MCAT scores are. You assume they are all lying, right? Just because you won't share your scores with others doesn't mean everyone else won't share theirs. My point there was the administration let us know that the bar is higher now and the students coming in this year and last have had better stats than in years pasts. So I being curious asked around to the students about what their stats were. And comon, lots of people ask about their collegue's stats when talking about what school they went to, what there major was and why they chose podiatry and the school they are at. So it seems from my experience of talking to students that what the administation said was correct.

The original point of my posts were that some on SDN stated they had good stats and were being rejected from Temple and worried if Temple could fill its class doing this. So I said I wasnt suprised since talking to classmates and the administration, it seems the standard is higher there right now. There are a lot of sharp people in my class who had great entrance stats and Temple filled more spots than years past. That was my point, that even with the standards higher, they can still fill the class.

Bdaddyjolley, I've done my own survey and there seems to be a correlation between heel pain and the Redskins' margin of victory over the Dallas Cowboys. One patient said that their heel felt slightly better when the Redskins won by a single digit victory. Another patient said that their heel felt a lot better after the Redskins won by a double digit victory over Dallas. So, I wasn't surprised since talking to patients in the clinic and to the Redskins' coaching staff, that it seems a complete shut-out over the Dallas Cowboys would totally eliminate heel pain in patients. My point is that Joe Gibbs let us know that the bar is higher now and the rookies coming in this year and last have had better stats than in years pasts. However, the coaching staff will not publicly display all the stellar stats of the incoming rookies. But hey, why would good old Joe Gibbs and my team mates lie about their own stats?

Evidence-based medicine at it's finest.